Parts NOT attacked

[K-453]

A list of parts 'Jack' did NOT mutilate in his victims. Just a thinking exercise, let's see where it leads.

- Hands

- Feet

- Hair: Okay, we do not know if he cut a single strand off as trophy. But most of it was still there.

- Brain: To difficult to get it out? Did he expect nothing interesting to be in his victim's heads?

- Eyes: Remarkable, thinking of Mary Jane. It suggests he did not attack her face blindly, but rather well-considered in spite of his rage.

- He also was not too interested in bowels and stomach. They were just thrown aside. - Parts with half-digested food in it were too icky?

- Everything at the backside of the body. - He could have turned the body around, but did not.

- Lungs? - Not sure about that. Mary's at least were 'broken and torn away'.


Looks like he was no foot fetishist and also no coprophile.

To me, it looks like 'Jack' was after the handy parts he could take out and hold, turn round, touch ...

At the same time, he acted out rage. That was why the face and everything female were attacked, too.

[kensei]

K-453, interesting observations, I think you are pretty much spot-on. I think that Mary Kelly represented what the Ripper wanted to do with every victim but had just never had the time and privacy for before. I think he was very much an extrovert who wanted to leave behind garish displays, and that as you say he was obsessed with destroying the body parts that exemplified the female. He left Mary's eyes staring out from her bare skull because it would look horrific. He cut off her breasts, held them in his hands, decided to place one of them underneath her head like a pillow. You can't dwell on that without shuddering. You mentioned the hands, though. Mary Kelly did have some cuts on her hands, though they could have been defensive wounds. She also had those big deep cuts on her left arm. That's always seemed to me to be more than defensive wounds, but just more flesh the Ripper chose to remove.

[lynn cates]

sooner rather than later

Hello Kensei.

"I think that Mary Kelly represented what the Ripper wanted to do with every victim but had just never had the time and privacy for before."

This brings up the question, "Then why didn't he?" If MJK's assailant was able to find an unprotected "unfortunate" living alone, in a court that was hard to recognise from the main street (being located through a small archway), then why could he not have done it initially--before the other slayings?

Cheers.
LC

[K-453]

Hello kensei,

the post mortem says, the arm wounds were inflicted after death. To me, they look like they are part of destroying beauty – making scratches on flawless surfaces. The skin on the inside of arms is soft and smooth. Maybe the Ripper wanted to destroy that.



Hello lynn cates,

'If MJK's assailant was able to find an unprotected "unfortunate" living alone, [...] then why could he not have done it initially?'

Mary did not live there alone, she was living with Barnett, and after he was gone, a friend slept at her place. She just happened to be there alone on the night before a bank holiday.

Still, good question. There were other prostitutes. Miller's Court was mostly let to prostitutes.
My guess is, before Mary, the Ripper rather attacked spontaneously and instinctively. Then, there was too much police on the streets, and he was forced to do more planning.
Maybe he did not like killing inside a room, for what reason ever. Maybe he just did not want to be with his victim in a room before he killed her. Claustrophobia, misanthrophy ...

[lynn cates]

opportunity

Hello K.

"My guess is, before Mary, the Ripper rather attacked spontaneously and instinctively."

Well, granting that, the MJK case was not exactly what he was wanting to do.

You're suggesting, perhaps, ONLY the extensive mutilations, etc? Could be, but, as you point out, he had opportunity before.

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

How Much Time

K-453, interesting observations, I think you are pretty much spot-on. I think that Mary Kelly represented what the Ripper wanted to do with every victim but had just never had the time and privacy for before..

I agree that he had more privacy, but I'm not sure about the time. The Ripper was not, so far as we know, interrupted (unless Thomas Bowyer did so at 10.45am) but how can he have known that he would not be interrupted? There was a fair degree of probability, given the circumstances, but no certainty.

[K-453]

Well, granting that, the MJK case was not exactly what he was wanting to do.

No case was exactly what he was was wanting to do ...

All the other women were killed outdoors. There must be a reason why 'Jack' did not go indoors before. Be it that he was a bit slow and just did not think of the possibility - or that he was terribly shy!

There must also be a reason why he, after a five week break, suddenly was back with a changed modus operandi. That murder looks done more deliberatedly than the others. Something forced him to think.

Too many cops on the streets, maybe. Bad weather. (It was raining heavily that night!) Finally realizing he never had enough time the other occasions.

My guess - and, of course, I can be wrong - is also, this time it was personal. He knew Mary, and something about her put him off.

[Barnaby]

Given that it is commonly accepted that Jack was targetting the female sex organs in his mutilations, it is interesting that only in the Kelly case were the breasts attacked. And in no case was the buttocks attacked. While I realize these aren't primary sex organs (despite the fact that Americans receive horrific sex ed), I suspect more than a few people on here consider them sexually relevent!

[kensei]

Just some random thoughts as I was reading everyones' responses- It's actually not completely true that the Ripper had never gone indoors before. He walked through a house full of sleeping people with Annie Chapman to the back yard, then presumably back through it again alone. That was quite risky. And if he was the killer of Martha Tabram, he took her not exactly indoors but at least into the confines of an enclosed stairwell.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I would suggest that the police presence on the streets were a lot to do with, not only the change of venue, but also time.
The Ripper was considered a night stalker, even Chapman would have fallen into that frame, he was expected to strike down alleyways , somewhere dark and secluded.
But he would not have been expected to strike in broad daylight, inside a room, not only by the police but by potential victims.
This I would say led to the downfall of Mary Kelly.
The clues are there.
But Casebook dismisses them
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

cogito ergo sum

Hello K.

"There must be a reason why 'Jack' did not go indoors before."

I believe so. Try this question, "Is it possible there never WAS a 'Jack' to begin with?"

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

information please

Hello (again) K.

"My guess - and, of course, I can be wrong - is also, this time it was personal. He knew Mary, and something about her put him off."

Perhaps her being something like an informant?

Cheers.
LC

[Malcolm X]

Hello (again) K.

"My guess - and, of course, I can be wrong - is also, this time it was personal. He knew Mary, and something about her put him off."

Perhaps her being something like an informant?

Cheers.
LC

yes, you could be wrong !

[K-453]

"Is it possible there never WAS a 'Jack' to begin with?"

Of course it is possible. As he - or they - never got caught, we just do not know who he was - or they were.

But it is likely there was a 'Jack'.

The copycats usually satisfied themselves with waving knifes in a pub and screaming, "I am Jack the Ripper!" Which resulted in 14 days hard labour for them.

Or are you hinting at the Royal Conspiracy?

[lynn cates]

Royals

Hello K.

"Or are you hinting at the Royal Conspiracy?"

Oh, good heavens, no. As much as I like and admire Queen Victoria, it is my estimate that there was not enough grey matter collectively present in the Royal Family to concoct ANYTHING--except, perhaps, a cucumber sandwich.

No, I've other fish to fry.

Cheers.
LC